I don't usually read his stuff, but I thought this was semi-interesting. He rates them on factors including "age", "health", "impact to date", "potential growth", and "hard to replace". Then each player is given an overall score.

I'm not sure I agree with some of these. Personally I think Leon is too low. I also think Bruce is a little high, and I've been one of his supporters.

Thoughts?

Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???

Interesting idea, but I think his "potential growth" category causes him to overvalue the younger players -- leads to situations where guys like Scruggs and Sweezy are ranked above Lynch. Which, IMHO, is a bit crazy.

HawkFanNC wrote:Interesting idea, but I think his "potential growth" category causes him to overvalue the younger players -- leads to situations where guys like Scruggs and Sweezy are ranked above Lynch. Which, IMHO, is a bit crazy.

That was the flaw in the formula for me as well. If a player is one of the elite in their position in the league, what does their potential growth matter?

HawkFanNC wrote:Interesting idea, but I think his "potential growth" category causes him to overvalue the younger players -- leads to situations where guys like Scruggs and Sweezy are ranked above Lynch. Which, IMHO, is a bit crazy.

That was the flaw in the formula for me as well. If a player is one of the elite in their position in the league, what does their potential growth matter?

Agreed. Guys like Mebane need to be way higher.

Tru2RedNGold25 wrote:Us as Niners fan have every right to rep Niners all day everyday when we have the hardware to back it up do can u guys say that???

Lynch is a stud, but RB's still a position where a team should be able to chew up a youngun on their first deal. Lynch's running style makes him elite and unique. That style was necessary to make the 2010, 2011 and early 2012's team even respectable. Now that the Seahawks have a QB, his running style may just be a tasty cherry on top.

If Lynch blew his knee out in preseason next year, it'd suck, but with Cable and Wilson, the offense is still top 10. You couldn't say that before.

kearly wrote:I just kind of glanced at it, but his system really undervalues Frank Omiyale big time. He and Flynn were probably the two best pure backup players on the team this last season.

I thought that too, seeing Omiyale that far down. With Okung, out, Omiyale came up big in the Cowboys game, as I recall, dealing with DeMarcus Ware.With the OL injuries we seem to have, Cable's system relies on having some decent utilitymen to plug in. Left Tackle fill-in is rather key.

HawkFanNC wrote:Interesting idea, but I think his "potential growth" category causes him to overvalue the younger players -- leads to situations where guys like Scruggs and Sweezy are ranked above Lynch. Which, IMHO, is a bit crazy.

That was the flaw in the formula for me as well. If a player is one of the elite in their position in the league, what does their potential growth matter?

It wasn't a bad effort, just a deeply flawed one in his formula. Yes, it's nuts for Scruggs and Sweezy to be listed above Lynch, but more importantly, Lynch should be in "Core" for the formula to be judged as useful. Lynch is a player who inspires others to lift their game. Offensive linement hold their blocks longer. Wide receivers pay more attention to their block on a given play. Linemen hustle downfield to get additional blocks, knowing that anything can happen with the ball in Lynch's hands. Hell, WILSON runs downfield to block for Lynch. So it needs a rating of "improves/inspires other players around him" or something like that. Wilson would score off the charts on that too... Love seeing that pic of Chiefs Eric Berry airborne, upside down as Wilson runs by... not to mention the crushing block by Tate on Sean Lee.Anyway, the chart was food for thought to discuss and debate. Agreed, the "potential for growth" is WAY overvalued... rather, the factor should be called, "Projected value in 2 seasons". In 2 seasons, chances are good Lynch is still performing at an elite level. After that, who knows.

I am sure John and Pete have something much more involved, breaking down their players, and also incorporating the salary & cap data, their "moneyball" formula. It would be interesting to see what their player ratings are. So a collective-best-thinking version of this chart, with a better model, would be a useful tool for us armchair GM's.

Reminds me of competitive club soccer tryouts, trying to decide which player on the bubble to keep and which to let go...Of course, something like this is more about what position groups need to be strengthened in the offseason, in order to HAVE difficult, high-quality problems about who to keep and who to release.Isn't it great how the problems have become much higher-quality, instead of rooting for the underdog kid to make the team, and play on special teams, we're regretting each cut, because they are players who can actually PLAY in the NFL, and that other teams will pick up as starters? (P.S. the Lions can keep Kris Dropham, er, Durham)

Do people think Greg Scruggs has that much more upside than Jaye Howard, the way the spreadsheet numbers suggest?

Just for fun... my modified version of it came out as follows. I collapsed out the numerical scores, though I redid a lot of them. I don't claim any special expertise at the individual scores, but I didn't like some of his.I also changed the performance/impact to only reflect the 2012 season... "what have you done for me lately"Some of the most egregious, glaring issues in Hawkblogger's formula involved Lynch & Mebane. Some of the issues with my modified one involve Rice and Clemons... but I think those are more factoring in injury concerns.And it seems like Baldwin should be higher, and McCoy a little lower. Baldwin had a below-expectations season, while McCoy had an unexpectedly good season. That reflects the emphasis on 2012 performance. Also possibly Moffit should be higher. He was injured and/or beaten out by Sweezy a good chunk of the season.The other thing that jumps out is the weakness of the DL position group going forward, plus the need for more talent in the OL.So we'll see how those ratings stack up with what Pete & John DO as we move through the offseason.

I love Doug, but he's not the dynamic playmaker Tate is. Golden made some absolutely ridiculous catches all year that not too many guys can make, including Doug. I think we Rice, Tate, and Baldwin make up our key pieces at WR, everybody else is very replaceable, but Baldwin is by far the most replaceable of the 3.

And I get the whole devaluation of RBs, but it seems like his ranking system really hammers guys for already being in their prime. Lynch is an elite talent with an ability to push for extra yards that we'd be improbably lucky to get again. Turbin ain't that guy. I think for guys like hawkblogger, Lynch will fit the 'you don't know what you got til it's gone' bill.

I am not sure that long-term prospects of Marshawn Lynch are that great. he had nagging leg and back issues all year.

yes, the dude is still young, but I have a terrible feeling that his wheels will start falling off very soon, probably 2 seasons from now, and he will take a backseat to Turbin. I would be happy to be wrong, its just my gut feel.

Bipolar wrote:I am not sure that long-term prospects of Marshawn Lynch are that great. he had nagging leg and back issues all year.

yes, the dude is still young, but I have a terrible feeling that his wheels will start falling off very soon, probably 2 seasons from now, and he will take a backseat to Turbin. I would be happy to be wrong, its just my gut feel.

I too have a feeling that the decline of Lynch will likely be very sudden and very painful for all of us. Just like it was for Marion Barber III. Dudes who run that hard at the RB position just cannot last forever. I think that is why you have to knock his overall value down, at least in the long term. Short term, he is one of the 2 or 3 most valuable players on the team no doubt. But in the long run, many of the players on roster have a lot more value to the team.

He is still young, so hopefully he will have at least another 2-3 very good years. He is my favorite player on the Hawks so I hope so.

I love Doug, but he's not the dynamic playmaker Tate is. Golden made some absolutely ridiculous catches all year that not too many guys can make, including Doug. I think we Rice, Tate, and Baldwin make up our key pieces at WR, everybody else is very replaceable, but Baldwin is by far the most replaceable of the 3.

And I get the whole devaluation of RBs, but it seems like his ranking system really hammers guys for already being in their prime. Lynch is an elite talent with an ability to push for extra yards that we'd be improbably lucky to get again. Turbin ain't that guy. I think for guys like hawkblogger, Lynch will fit the 'you don't know what you got til it's gone' bill.

Well said. And then Tate does crazy, ridiculous things after the catch, making players miss, getting first downs, things that are just jaw-dropping to see a smallish wide receiver do. Immediately two games come to mind we don't win without Tate making huge plays, of course the Green Bay game, and also the Patriots game (I think he had 2 TD's in that one), and probably a couple more, getting key 1st downs with YAC, etc. I felt like maybe Baldwin just wasn't really healthy all year, didn't develop the timing/chemistry with Wilson, just something was missing all year. But even a healthy Baldwin doesn't make the kind of plays Tate did.

Hawkblogger strikes me as almost a mad scientist who gets so attached to "that which ought to be" (giving a bonus for having future upside) that it can cause a temporary loss of focus on "that which is" (players playing at an elite level, who will likely continue to for a couple more years, e.g., Lynch). Reminds me of a past coworker who was brilliant in building amazing things, but sometimes needed some marketing guidance, to build the right things that were useful and solved real problems real people. It's all good, I can work with that.

Bipolar wrote:I am not sure that long-term prospects of Marshawn Lynch are that great. he had nagging leg and back issues all year.

yes, the dude is still young, but I have a terrible feeling that his wheels will start falling off very soon, probably 2 seasons from now, and he will take a backseat to Turbin. I would be happy to be wrong, its just my gut feel.

I too have a feeling that the decline of Lynch will likely be very sudden and very painful for all of us. Just like it was for Marion Barber III. Dudes who run that hard at the RB position just cannot last forever. I think that is why you have to knock his overall value down, at least in the long term. Short term, he is one of the 2 or 3 most valuable players on the team no doubt. But in the long run, many of the players on roster have a lot more value to the team.

He is still young, so hopefully he will have at least another 2-3 very good years. He is my favorite player on the Hawks so I hope so.

PC/JS came in with a 4-year plan. Year 3 was pretty decent in the final analysis. We all know in hindsight just how talent-poor and crappy the roster was when they arrived. I wonder how long they try to plan ahead now, given the progress. NFL = Not For Long. That's why I'm thinking a 2-year horizon, or really current year + 2 years horizon, in terms of a player's value, with a few notable exceptions, primarily QB, OL, where 6-8-10 years is not uncommon. Players who over-rely on speed get physically beaten down, injured, lose a step after rehab, and then have to adjust to playing smarter. Players who take a pounding, RBs, just don't tend to last long. I am still in awe of how long Mack Strong managed to last and play at a high level for the Seahawks.

It seems like we all agree that Marshawn has maybe 2 more good years ahead, and then the risk of a dropoff goes up exponentially. Frankly, I was shocked and delighted at the year Lynch had this year. Somehow they nursed him through the season and he was able to come out and turn on BeastMode pretty much every game. I'm just going to appreciate him while he's here. He is a unique, special talent, as much because of HOW he plays the game and inspires the players around him to pick up their game. The reality is that the wheels could fall off at any time without advance notice. With Shaun Alexander, it was like a light switch flipped off, just totally lost his edge. We're all hoping/expecting/reasonably planning for 2 years of BeastMode. It could be 2 more games, or it could be 5 more years. If I'm Pete and John, I'm looking hard at drafting a running back in a couple years, because we still don't know all that Turbin will bring, but for sure we know there is only one BeastMode.